If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please note that posts cannot be deleted from the writing section. We will not remove texts that have been corrected, so please do not post any personal information in this section, especially in things like letters.

Could you please revise this for grammar?

Dear Forum Users,

I wonder if anyone could revise this short paragraph for grammar:

"In contrast to what we saw in examples (8) and (9), however, we do not seem to have an Irreality Space in (10). Both inputs include information about legitimate cultural standards or constitutional human rights: Input Space 1 constitutes an implied reference that a citizen (in our case the murderer) be given access to health care. Input Space 2, on the other hand, is structured by legal or juridical information: the murderer, under the provisions of the law, is sentenced to capital punishment in order to protect (other) citizens from him, who wish(ed) to take lives. Neither of the inputs is ‘irreal’ and also they do not seem to ‘clash’ in exactly the same way as we saw how the inputs get into conflict in examples (8) and (9). The source of tension in (10) is derived from the application of cultural and legitimate standards with diametrically opposite consequences to the very same person."

Re: Could you please revise this for grammar?

Dear Forum Users,

I wonder if anyone could revise this short paragraph for grammar:

"In contrast to what we saw in the examples (8) and (9), however, we do not seem to have an Irreality Space in (10). Both inputs include information about legitimate cultural standards or constitutional human rights: Input Space 1 constitutes an implied reference that a citizen (in our case the murderer) be given access to health care. Input Space 2, on the other hand, is structured by legal or juridical information: the murderer, under the provisions of the law, is sentenced to capital punishment in order to protect (other)the citizens from him, who wishes(ed) to take other people’s lives. (As it seems likely that he would kill again, take “wishes” – However, I can’t imagine people to wish killing others. I think that it must be a compulsive act, i.e. someone who feels himself compelled to kill.) Neither of the inputs is ‘irreal’ and also they do not seem to ‘clash’ in exactly the same way as we saw how the inputs get into conflict in the examples (8) and (9). The source of tension in (10) is derived from the application of cultural and legitimate standards with diametrically opposed consequences to the very same person."